HELLO.
NOW, WHAT DOES BEING IN A "ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIP" ENTAIL? WHAT CONSTITUTES BEING SOMEONE'S "BOYFRIEND", OR "GIRLFRIEND"? IN WHAT DOES BEING SOMEONE'S "BOYFRIEND", OR "GIRLFRIEND", CONSIST?
NOW, WHEN SOMEONE SAYS: "SHE IS MY 'GIRLFRIEND'.", OR "HE IS MY 'BOYFRIEND'.", WHAT DO THEY ACTUALLY MEAN?
This thread is nowhere near as smart as you think it is.
Go back to /lit/.
>>25232217
DO NOT PROJECT SO MUCH; NOT EVERYONE IS AS PRETENTIOUS AS YOURSELF TO BE ATTEMPTING TO FLAUNT THEIR INTELLECT WHENEVER THEY CAN.
>>25232258
You literally cultivated your own aesthetic, post with a tripcode, and think deconstructing basic concepts is clever. You are the pretentious one.
>>25232164
They mean that they have entered into an agreement whereby certain emotions and actions are exclusively shared with the other.
That's the beautiful and powerful thing about it that most miss, Its a title that two people create together and can decide what the rules, purpose ect are.
But generally people just go 38th the flow. This can cause huge problems.
Personally I spell it out for the other person what I want and what the title means, a great example is coming together and discussing what cheating is and why it's bad.
When I got engaged we already knew what it would mean, did we want kids, what about divorce?
When we were becoming "official" As boyfriend girlfriend we both knew the job description, it wasn't just for fun, it was to see if this is a person I would want to Marry.
So yeah, it means little, just like most words and titles, they need to be defined and it's up to you and your partner to decide.
>>25232164
what does this thread have to do with Christmas?
A recognition that you have emotional and sexual interests in one another and an agreement to act on them. In most cases it's also understood to be exclusive.
>>25232338
WHEN I SEE TWO TEENAGERS WHO ARE OBVIOUSLY "TOGETHER" AS "BOYFRIEND", AND "GIRLFRIEND", I WONDER WHAT DOES THEIR MUTUAL RELATIONSHIP, AS SUCH, ENTAIL; ARE THEY SEXUAL ACTIVE? IS SEXUAL ACTIVITY A REQUISITE FOR A "BOYFRIEND"/"GIRLFRIEND" RELATIONSHIP? IT IS CERTAIN THAT THAT ALONE DOES NOT CONSTITUTE THE RELATIONSHIP, AND I INFER THAT THE RELATIONSHIP CAN STILL EXIST WITHOUT SEXUAL ACTIVITY, SO I WANT TO KNOW WHAT ARE THE OTHER CONSTITUENTS OF THAT KIND OF RELATIONSHIP.
HOW DO THEY BECOME "BOYFRIEND" AND "GIRLFRIEND"?
>>25232445
>"ARE THEY SEXUAL ACTIVE?"
I MEAN: "ARE THEY SEXUALLY ACTIVE?"
This will be very strange, but I am part of a small cadre that follows your writings very closely.
Please add me on Skype.
tehglorious
>>25232477
1. YOUR ASSUMPTION IS ACCURATE: IT IS STRANGE --FOR ME--, BESIDE UNEXPECTED, THAT A GROUP OF PERSONS EXISTS TO "FOLLOW MY WRITINGS VERY CLOSELY"; I DO NOT BELIEVE IT.
2. I DO NOT USE "SKYPE".
3. WOULD I KNOW WHO YOU ARE?
WHY DID YOU TELL ME THIS?
>>25232445
It is possible for a romantic relationship to exist without sexual activity. It is a social contract in which both parties recognize that they are interested in eathother emotionally, that is, they experience a pleasurable sensation when in eachothers presence because of processes within the brain. It is not always necessary that both parties experience this sensation, relationships can also be used by one party to manipulate the other, or by both parties for other pragmatic reasons.
>>25232635
1. We are also familiar with R E I K OZ and RYZHKND. I've read MUNDUS extensively.
2. Oh.
3. No. This will be my last post in this thread, but just know that there are some who wish to enter the "HYPERZONE".
>>25232164
wait is this really you?
https://ryzhknd.bandcamp.com/
>>25232636
SO, AUTHENTIC "ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS" ARE BASED ON A MUTUAL AFFECTIVE ATTRACTION, AND SEXUAL ATTRACTION, AND SEXUAL ACTIVITY, IF THEY OCCUR, ARE MERELY AN EXTENSION, OR MANIFESTATION, OF THE SENTIMENTAL BOND.
I THINK THAT IT IS ACCURATE TO INFER THAT MOST "ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS" NOW ARE BASED ON MUTUAL SEXUAL ATTRACTION, AND/OR ON PRAGMATIC INTEREST, THEREFORE MOST "ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS" NOW ARE INAUTHENTIC --NOT ACTUAL "ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS", BUT RATHER "SEXUAL RELATIONSHIPS", AND/OR "PRAGMATIC RELATIONSHIPS", WHICH IS MOST PROBABLY WHY THE IDEAS OF "LOVE AT FIRST SIGHT", AND OF "LOVE" AS AN EMOTIONAL CONDITION --"BEING IN LOVE-- ARE SO PREVALENT IN THE COLLECTIVE SOCIAL CONSCIOUS; MOST PERSONS DO NOT EVEN KNOW WHAT LOVE IS, SO THIS KIND OF SPURIOUS NOTIONS ARE CONSTRUCTED AND PERPETUATED TO COMPENSATE FOR THE INCAPACITY FOR FEELING, AND COMPREHENDING.
WHEN A PERSON OF THIS KIND SAYS "SHE IS MY 'GIRLFRIEND'.", OR "HE IS MY 'BOYFRIEND'.", THEY MEAN THAT THEY ARE EITHER IN AN EXCLUSIVE MUTUAL SEXUAL CONTRACT, WITH POSSIBLE MUTUAL, OR UNILATERAL, PRAGMATIC INTEREST WHICH IS EITHER EXPLICIT, OR IMPLICIT.
I BEGIN TO COMPREHEND NOW, I THANK YOU.
I STILL WANT TO KNOW HOW IT IS THAT THE EXCLUSIVE MUTUAL SEXUAL CONTRACT COMES TO BE, BECAUSE I DO NOT THINK THAT IT IS ACTUALLY A BUREAUCRATIC PROCESS.
>7 posters
saged and hidden
